From the Tennessee Code Annotated:

39-14-203. Cock and animal fighting. --

(a) It is unlawful for any person to:

(1) Own, possess, keep, use or train any bull, bear, dog, cock, swine or other animal, for the purpose of fighting, baiting or injuring another such animal, for amusement, sport or gain;

(2) Cause, for amusement, sport or gain, any animal referenced in subdivision (a)(1) to fight, bait or injure another animal, or each other;

(3) Permit any acts stated in subdivisions (a)(1) and (2) to be done on any premises under the person's charge or control, or aid or abet those acts; or

(4) Be knowingly present, as a spectator, at any place or building where preparations are being made for an exhibition for the fighting, baiting or injuring of any animal, with the intent to be present at the exhibition, fighting, baiting or injuring.

(b) It is the legislative intent that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the training or use of hunting dogs for sport or to the training or use of dogs for law enforcement purposes.

(c) (1) Except for any offense involving a cock, an offense under subdivisions (a)(1)-(3) is a Class E felony.

(2) An offense involving a cock under subdivisions (a)(1)-(3) is a Class A misdemeanor.

(d) (1) An offense under subdivision (a)(4) is a Class B misdemeanor if the person is a spectator at a dog fight.

(2) Any other violation of subdivision (a)(4) is a Class C misdemeanor.

(e) It is not an offense to own, possess or keep cocks, or aid or abet the ownership, possession or keeping of cocks, for the sole purpose of selling or transporting cocks to a location in which possession or keeping of cocks is legal.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1990, ch. 625, §§ 1, 2; 2007, ch. 216, § 1; 2007, ch. 555, § 1.]

Alright, it looks like you have opened up a can of worms, here. Well, less forget about dogs for a minute. What about "Rooster Fights"? I know an outstanding citizen of the community that has numerous trophies for this sport. (If it is to be called a sport) Trophies are given out....isn't that a sport? Even though an animal is put to death. Just wanted to know some of your feelings on it.

Ever notice that when people talk about serial killers and psycopaths the sentence "well, he did kill animals when he was little" comes up a few times?

What should we do with Mr. Vick? Give him back his multi-million dollar career as if nothing happened? Let him own more dogs? He broke the law and I hope he rots in jail and in his own misery and shame for the rest of his life.

Summer before last my neighbors son kicked my kids puppy on my property. He spent 3 days at the vet and cost me about $300.00 I did not say anything to my neighbors about it (wanted to keep the peace). Last summer the same kid from next door about 8yrs. old hit my 3yr. old in the mouth full speed ahead with a baseball busting his mouth and almost knocked out his front teeth. My son at 3 cant pitch baseball and didnt have on a glove. This also happened on my property! I understand property rights and my neighbors do now since we wont allow their son back in our yard! I relate this to the kids that set the dog on fire. NEXT TIME if not punished it might be a kid rather than a dog!

Thank you for the compliments.

My 'hyperbole' referred to the tendency humans have to take a loophole and run with it.

Tell a child that he must leave the candy for guests but he can eat any damaged treats and there are going to be plenty of confectionary casualties that won't pass triage.

Tell someone who delights in abusing animals that he is damaging 'property' and he will see torturing his animals as no different from destroying any other chattel and immolating a neighbor's pet as no different from setting their lawn furniture on fire.

There was a time when the rape of a virgin was a 'property crime',too and one could beat any member of his own household with impunity.

Restrict decent treatment to humans and such a person will decide that a given class of people 'aren't really human' and he has permission to perform atrocities that would make Mengele ill.

He will interpret reality according to his convenience.

As for the child who killed the cat,a toddler may not know how damaging his actions are nor be aware of the consequences.

For HIM, hitting the kitten,the television or another child would be as easy a mistake to make as treating the living room wallpaper as a coloring book.

But,does he now know to leave tools alone?

Does he know that hitting hurts?

Yes,I'd watch him for a few years.

If he shows signs of repeating the incident,get him help.

If he obsesses over it once he's old enough to recognize his guilt,help him to forgive himself and move on.

A school age child should have a much clearer idea of right and wrong than one that's barely weaned.

Societies have made laws that an animal who suffered when slain could not be eaten.

Similarly,we have set down rules at the Geneva Convention for how we treat each other.

Without making and enforcing rules about abuse,the people without a healthy conscience will take any excuse and any opportunity to practice their hobby -whether it be shooting horses or dragging boys by the neck behind a truck.

It's not about the victims,it's about the perpetrators being a source of pain and death as surely as a case of anthrax.

We do no avoidable harm and we take no pleasure in what suffering occurs anyway.

That should be the rule-period.

It is really refreshing to see an article where the reporter believes in property rights. It is equally disgusting to see comments by individuals who can't seem to grasp the difference between their property and the neighbors property. Keep up the good work. Oh by the way, I read where HSUS killed 17,000 more dogs last year than M. Vick

I certainly won't seek criminal charges against my neighbor. Civil proceedings, maybe...I think a million bucks will do to ease my pain and suffering, eh?

-- Posted by nmonajjem on Wed, Oct 31, 2007, at 10:22 AM

I'd rather see my neighbor in Jail or Hell! They could keep their money. I dont have a monetary value where my pets are concerned!

I'm also interested in your reply to the questioning from cherylrichardson!

You have to take into consideration that not only did Vick fight the dogs, but he and others illegally gambled on them as well. He killed them, when they didn't perform well. Not just one law broken there, but two. It was a money making business of cruelty. Some of those videos are horrendous.

Also, many that commit acts of cruelty to companion animals are responsible for crimes of domestic abuse and other violent crimes to humans. There IS a link. Visit the American Humane Association site at:

http://www.americanhumane.org/site/PageS...

Personally, not only do I think that criminal charges should be passed for animal fighting and other acts of animal cruelty, but I think they should be felonies in every state. That is just my opinion, and I know that everyone has their own. But if you've ever nursed an abused animal back to health and a healthy state of mind, you tend to feel that way.

nmonajjem- I really would like to know how you feel about the juveniles that set fire purposely to the dog, Angel, in Nashville with a blow torch. Do you feel that they should not face criminal charges either? Do you feel that is different from dog fighting? Why or why not?

Excellent, quantumcat!

I am in agreement with you, we are saying the same thing, in principle. But criminal law does not work by principle, only by its letter. Currently, we cannot accurately and justifiably (and without exception) differentiate acts against animals that are "protecting, feeding, clothing" from those that are "pathological, tasteless, sinful" to the point that a human should go to jail.

As far as your "who is human enough", I think you take your argument into the realm of hyperbole. All that are born from the union of two human beings are, from conception, both physically and spiritually alive...the existence of physical or mental defect does not diminish or lessen the power and potential of the soul.

Deliberate cruelty is the difference.

If we condone taking delight in another's death or misery because they aren't human,when does the question become who is human enough?

The believer in a new creed tossed in with the lions?

The Down's Syndrome child hunted no differently than the rhino or the fox?

The elderly woman shot as she launders her clothes because her killer is bored and her scalp could buy his tobacco?

There is concern that animal cruelty is a 'gateway crime' because it is likely that the perpetrator never learned that cruelty was wrong,was taught that torture was legitimate entertainment or is somehow impaired so that he cannot empathasize or comprehend his society's laws.

Bloodsports,snuff films and their ilk have nothing to do with protecting ourselves,feeding and clothing our families or even making sure our cosmetics and cleansers are safe.

They exist to exploit our dominion over the strong and deny the stewardship we have over the weak.

Society needs to impress upon its members that such abuse is not only tasteless and pathological,it is sin.

If we are too civilized to let executing criminals or interrogating enemies of the state be an excuse for becoming monsters,why should anyone be allowed to maim,terrorize or kill ANY being as if that were the equivalent of playing a game of Scrabble?

Several years ago I had a deer hunter call me at home one Saturday afternoon to take what he called a really interesting picture for the T-G.

He was bow hunting and had been in a deer stand that day and didn't have a single deer come near enough for a shot.

But, a large rattlesnake took up residence just below the tree. He tried tossing a few things down and Mr. Rattler refused vacate the premises.

He finally solved the problem by shooting an arrow through the rattlesnake. It was an unusual picture and it did run in the T-G.

Interesting. The primary difference in today is hunting is also a part of game management. Many of these animals would starve without some thinning of the population. The vast majority of game animals (deer, turkey etc) also end up as food as well.

In the case of dog or cockfighting, these animals are bred for the express purpose of providing an outlet for illegal betting. They are often kept in poor conditions and then destroyed only when they are too beaten up or lose a couple of fights.

I don't hunt primarily because getting up at 4am to go sit in a tree in freezing weather holds little alure for me. But those that do actually provide a service that helps to maintain an overall healthy game population.

Hey, when's the "go live" date for the hospital?